Donate SIGN UP

Jobsworthery At Its Worst..............

Avatar Image
ToraToraTora | 13:16 Sat 04th Mar 2023 | News
25 Answers
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 25rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Tory b*stard.
Its council owned, so they have a duty to keep the fire exit clear. Nothing more to be said apart from the fact that if people did die trying to escape through a blocked exit. The council woul be at fault.
Question Author
what are you on about gromit?
Question Author
nicebloke, they could have done that without smashing the whole thing up.
I was going to post about this last night. Petty, nasty, and shameful.
Couldn't they have worked on an agreeable solution? Not that I even see a problem. It was lovely and tidy...and gave that poor woman something to do. 17 years of love and care...destroyed.
You know as do I that a lot of what local press print can be blown up to make councils look bad, but who knows?
The worst horticultural vandalism since Les Ferdinand wrecked the Blue Peter Italian sunken garden ...
I'm sure there's another thread on this.
Question Author
OG there was but it disappeared no idea why.
Perhaps a member of the council is a mad here.

Dash it, wrote a sizeable reply on that one.
Mod !!!!

Sorry Freudian slip.
//OG there was but it disappeared no idea why.//

Maybe it was "blocking a fire escape". (โ—”โ—กโ—”)
This report is very one-sided. Local press tell a very different story.
Question Author
MWG, so what's the local press version?
//I'm sure there's another thread on this.///

Yes, there was, from me. No idea why it was pulled unless it was because it had the word bloody in the title. Or perhaps Ed is a bit sore because I criticised him in another thread.

(In care it gets censored here, the word is ydoolb in reverse)
Excerpt from article;

// Robert Reid, the council's cabinet member for housing and property, claimed some of the plants blocked a fire exit and therefore had to be removed //

// Its council owned, so they have a duty to keep the fire exit clear//

So why smash up the shed?

This is nothing less than wanton destruction by actions of the council.

Should this item of news go viral triggering a crowd funding campaign, one would only be too happy to see South Kesteven District Council charged with criminal damage.
Is this local? It appears to be the same report I read in the DM.

https://www.stamfordmercury.co.uk/news/keen-gardener-86-lost-it-all-to-clean-up-9301804/
There are very few rules on a garden shed, put there are some. The only reason I can think of, is because it was on council land, not a private garden.
Its not easy to say if the council went over the top or not, you would need more pictures of the obstruction claimed, and a lot more info.
People must understand that they cannot take over a communal space by doing something that they consider to be nice. The area is not their's to decide to take over and then hide behind I am a little old lady who meant no harm.
Looking at the link given by pasta, its pretty obvious that when the garden was first done it was well maintained. Its not been since by the look of the pictures. Over grown and shabby, even taking into consideration of the present clear up.

1 to 20 of 25rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Jobsworthery At Its Worst..............

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.